Michael Keany

October 2026

Every generation seems convinced that schools were better when its members were young. Students were more respectful, teachers demanded more, academic standards were higher, and parents supported discipline. Today's students, critics insist, cannot read, write, think critically, or behave appropriately.

But was education really better in the “good old days”? Research suggests that our memories of the past are often more flattering than the historical evidence warrants.

The Myth of Educational Decline

In The Manufactured Crisis (1995), David Berliner and Bruce Biddle challenged the widespread belief that American public schools had experienced catastrophic academic deterioration. They argued that misleading statistics, selective comparisons, and political agendas had created an exaggerated narrative of educational failure.

Richard Rothstein reached similar conclusions in The Way We Were? (1998). His historical analysis demonstrated that schools had made substantial progress in educating populations previously underserved or excluded. Minority achievement had improved, dropout rates had declined, and educational opportunities had expanded.

Comparing today's diverse student population with yesterday's more selective graduating classes can produce misleading conclusions.

Importantly, neither argument means schools have no problems. The 2024 National Assessment of Educational Progress documented genuine recent declines in reading achievement. However, recent setbacks do not establish that schools were universally superior generations ago.

Why We Remember the Past So Fondly

Psychologists Adam Mastroianni and Daniel Gilbert examined perceptions of moral decline in a remarkable 2023 study published in Nature.

Analyzing research involving approximately 12.5 million people, they found that individuals across at least 60 countries believed morality was deteriorating. Yet historical surveys revealed little evidence of the sustained decline in everyday morality that respondents imagined.

Their explanation involves two psychological tendencies: negative information attracts our attention, while unpleasant memories often fade more rapidly than pleasant ones.

Consequently, yesterday becomes increasingly attractive while today's problems remain painfully visible.

“Kids These Days!”

John Protzko and Jonathan Schooler investigated another familiar complaint in their 2019 study, Kids These Days.

Across five studies, they discovered something fascinating: adults who considered themselves particularly intelligent tended to believe younger generations were becoming less intelligent. Adults who valued reading thought today's children read less. Those who prized respect for authority perceived young people as increasingly disrespectful.

In other words, our judgments about today's children often reflect our own characteristics rather than reliable evidence of generational deterioration.

Researchers also found that adults projected their current strengths backward, imagining that children in their youth possessed similar qualities.

When Nostalgia Becomes Educational Policy

Nostalgia becomes dangerous when romanticized memories substitute for evidence-based educational decisions.

Political leaders can exploit perceived decline by promising to restore traditional discipline, unquestioning obedience, rigid curricula, and supposedly lost moral values.

Such appeals are not confined to one political ideology, although authoritarian movements frequently employ narratives of national deterioration and promised restoration.

The educational consequences can be significant. Schools may embrace memorization without understanding, compliance without judgment, and punishment without examining underlying causes.

Ironically, the past being celebrated often included educational exclusion, discriminatory practices, and limited opportunities for many children.

What Great School Leaders Should Do

Effective principals neither romanticize the past nor dismiss legitimate concerns about contemporary education.

They examine achievement trends carefully, recognize historical progress, acknowledge genuine learning losses, and distinguish academic rigor from authoritarian control.

They preserve worthwhile traditions—including strong literacy instruction, demanding expectations, and personal responsibility—while embracing improved knowledge about learning, motivation, inclusion, and child development.

Most importantly, they refuse to confuse familiarity with effectiveness.

The essential question is not whether schools were better when we were young. It is whether we are using the best available evidence to make schools better for the children we serve today.

References

1. Berliner, D. C., & Biddle, B. J. (1995). The Manufactured Crisis: Myths, Fraud, and the Attack on America's Public Schools. Addison-Wesley.

2. Rothstein, R. (1998). The Way We Were? The Myths and Realities of America's Student Achievement. Century Foundation Press. Book information.

3. Mastroianni, A. M., & Gilbert, D. T. (2023). The illusion of moral decline. Nature, 618, 782–789. Read the study.

4. Protzko, J., & Schooler, J. W. (2019). Kids these days: Why the youth of today seem lacking. Science Advances, 5(10), eaav5916. Read the study.

5. National Center for Education Statistics. (2025). The Nation's Report Card: 2024 Reading Assessment. View results.

Leadership Reflection: When educators describe the schools of their childhood as superior, are they recalling historical reality—or comparing their fondest memories of yesterday with the most troubling challenges of today?

------------------------------

Prepared with the assistance of AI software OpenAI. (2026). ChatGPT (5.2) [Large language model]. https://chat.openai.com